The Laurens advertiser. (Laurens, S.C.) 1885-1973, 1887-09-21
TO THE GERALD.

diouslr avoided the subject which
first called it forth, we regret this
necessity. But the latest onslaught,
filed as ii is, from the first line to
the closing scntr &C, with design
cd misrepresentation and pcrrer-
sionS of facts, leaves US no other
alternative.
The Herald begins by stating
that Mr. Young speaks OF tw0 arti-
clos only. Mr. Young states positive
~, ~ nm tho authOrof the articles
signed "rotc Fair" published in
THE ADVERTISERS in Sept. 1856"
Could anything be more positive?
i there any evasion or equivocn-
ton in this statement. Does the
word "artirlrs" include only two,
or does it mean srcry article pub
lished in this pepper ut that time.
Does the fact that it is sworn to sol
umnly alter the statement. We
leave those who read to answer.
lDhl, tbllblNI WV ! al 40 81
matter of fact, (substnntiated by
our tiles) that only tm0 articles ha re
ever appeared in the columns Of
THE ADVERTISER signed "Tote
Fair
This straw, is rather weak.
Tho Herald remarks in the next
place:
Rntif MIR Young's affidavit rrovcs
swcars II proves that MIR J. G. Garlinh-
ton. either unintcntionally ar drsignOu-
", Owe lcaveh him to say.) mi>rcprssen-
ted tho real author ct "Totr rair.' At
name OF tho author, at tho suggestion
of"Totc Fair" himself, he, Mr. J.t Gar
lington, MS we havo before stated in
these columns. plainly intimated that
Mr. Young was not the author.
Now, after admitting that We
gave the name of II. III. Young rs
the author OF the articles, it Is said
we eliminated that Mr. Young was
not tho author" What man would
cvcr thus stultify himself? We
have only this to say concerning
that charge: 1t is false.
We did not intimate to Mr. r. b.
Crews CT Mr. anybody else, that Mr.
Young was not the author Of these
articles, but on the contrary, when
Mr. II. Is. Grows stated to us that
he did not believe that Mr. Young
, wretc the articles, we stated to
him, that very few persons had sus-
pected Mr. Young, and that many
persons who had mentioned the
controversy, suggested other
names az the author; but, that SO
far as we knew, II. III. Young alone,
was the author. Mr. Young had
authorized us to give his name as
the author, and We knew nothing
which would lead us to SUPP ose
anyone else had "hand in the pie
But the Herald says We gave
"signs OF embarrassment" which
"showed guilt" Guilty Of what ?
we would like to know. Why does
the Herald suppose if we had writ
ten the articles we would have de
MED it" What did the articles
contain? What was there to make
us either afraid or ashamed to come
out boldly and acknowledge the
authorship If it had been ours. We
did not sec oursclt rs he saw us,
but certain it is we fcltnO cause for
tho slightest agitation or cmharras-
mcnt. We have stated that when
Mr. T. B. Crews came to us for MI
Houngs name, he not only intima-
ted that ne knew the copy used by
tho printer was not in the hand.
writing Of the author, but that he
Encm IL wns in u hdndwriting
This statement he now denies, but
true ut the time. | am positive he
did make this intimatiou, and
while ut that time as now, saw
nothing in it to nus "embarras-
ment" did see cause for the great
est amaZrmcnt. How did Mr.
Crews got this information, known
as ! thought, only to Mr. Young,
Mr. Lockwood and myself?
The Herald makes an effort to
clear Mr. Lockwood, SO 10 says:
In iuticr to him ii Is proper that wo
state that while tho controversy with
"Iotc Fair was in progress he never
nmontioned tn" matter to us. Ho did
not ''bctrav the secret" while employed
in THE ADVERTISER Office.
No human being could have seen
me copy Mr. YounGs article for the
printer, save Mr. Il. ii. Young him.
RcIf. No human being could have
known that I did so make the copy,
except Mr. Young and Mr. Lock-
Hunnn nulnca IlnN nnnnn hr aI,nl. La